Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1982-12-01MINUTES HUNTINGTON BEACH BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENTS Room B-6 - Civic Center 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach,., CA WEDNESDAY-, DECEMBER 1, 1982 - 1::30 P.M. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT'.. Spencer, Evans, Smith, Vogelsang BOARD -MEMBER ABSENT:- Kelly MINUTES:-. ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY EVANS, THE MINUTES OF' THE REGULAR' MEETING OF' NOVEMBER 17, 1982, WERE APPROVED.AS TRANSCRIBED BY THE FOLLOWING'VOTE: AYES: Spencer, Evans,, Smith, Vogelsang NOES: None ABSTAIN: None REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS:. CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO.. 82=67' Applicant-- Don Haberlein' To permit a three (3)' foot reduction in a required open -space dimension. Property located at- 8681 Doremere Street.. Acting Chairman Evans -introduced the proposal and stated that this request is Categorically Exempt, Class, 5,. California Environmental Quality Act,- 1970. Acting Secretary Spencer -informed the Board Members that the applicant wishes to add a passive solar collector room addition,. approximately 10 ft, x 15 ft., to the rear of his home encroaching,three (3) feet. into the required 25-ft.. open space minimum dimension. He stated that although the applicant has'over 1,400 square feet of open space he does not meet the twenty-five.foot open space minimum dimension required by Code. The public hearing was opened by Acting Chairman Evans with the - applicant, Mr-. Don Haberlein and Mr.- Andy Martin, Contractor, present to speak in favor of the proposal. Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 1, 1982 Page Two Mr. Haberlein introduced himself to the Board and stated that the proposed room addition will be contiguous with his dwelling filling in the "L" shape existing at the rear of his home. He further stated that his home and the proposed room addition (if approved) will both be located twenty-two (22) feet from the property line. The applicant also stated that should approval not be granted it would prevent him from expanding at an economical cost per square foot but that with proper installation will effectively help him take advantage of his right to solar energy. Mr. Martin addressed the Board and stated that the proposed room addition meets all State requirements as a passive solar collector and exceeds the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. The public hearing was closed. Extensive Board discussion ensued in an effort to establish findings for hardship as this application was not a typical request for a variance. ON MOTION BY VOGELSANG AND SECOND BY SPENCER, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 82-67 WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED WITH REASONS, FINDINGS, AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOLLOWING, BY VOTE AS FOLLOWS: REASONS: 1. Placement of the applicant's house on the lot could have been built six (6) feet closer to the street. The square footage in the applicant's rear yard exceeds the requirements of the Code. 2. Rear yard recreational requirements are equivalent to what the Code intended. 3. The main recreation area exceeds the intent of the Ordinance Code providing for same. The encroachment is minimal with required open space dimension remaining in the rear yard after completion of addition. FINDINGS: 1. The granting of the Conditional Exception will not constitute a grant of a special privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the vicinity. 2. Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity. 3. The granting of a conditional exception is necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. -2- BZA 12/1/82 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 1, 1982 Page Three 4. The granting of a conditional exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property in the same zone classifications. 5. The granting of the conditional exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach, CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: A. TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS: 1. The conceptual plot plan and elevations received November 12, 1982, shall be the approved layout. In its approval action, the Board of Zoning Adjustments considered the following issues relating to the conceptual plan: - Lot area; - Lot width and lot depth; - Type of use and its relation to property and improvements in the immediate vicinity. B. GENERAL CONDITION: 1. Existing sliding glass doors between proposed addition and main dwelling shall remain. AYES: Spencer, Evans, Smith, Vogelsang NOES: None ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 82-66 Applicant: Mr. Joseph Marucci To permit an addition to encroach 2'6" into required rear setback from existing property line. Property located at 710 - 12th Street. Acting Chairman Evans introduced the application and stated that this request is categorically exempt, Class. 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Acting Secretary Spencer outlined the history behind the area in which the subject property is located. He stated that the -majority of homes were built under the old standards. Numerous structures in the area have zero rear yard setbacks, depending on when they were built. The applicant's property abuts an alley and is located in the R-1 zone. One block from the applicant's residence is the-Townlot Area which allows 7-1/2 foot rear yard setbacks when a lot abuts an -3- BZA 12/1/82 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 1, 1982 Page Four alley. The R-1 zoning requirement for a rear yard setback is ten (10) feet from the property line for the main structure and allows a five (5) foot setback for a garage structure. The applicant's proposal is to build a room addition in his rear yard with a garage setback at 11-1/2 feet from the property line with a four (4) foot overhang for the second story addition encroaching into the required ten (10) foot rear yard setback from the property line leaving a net area of 7-1/2 feet which is consistent to what has been down in the Townlot area located in close proximity to the applicant's home. The public hearing was opened by Acting Chairman Evans. Mr. Joseph Marucci, applicant, addressed the Board. He submitted to the Board Members a sketch outlining neighboring properties setbacks located less than five (5) feet from their rear yard setbacks abutting the alley. The applicant was informed by Mr. Spencer of the Code requirement for a ten (10) foot separation in lieu of the six (6) foot separation shown on his site plan between proposed addition and existing accessory structure. The applicant felt it would be no problem to relocate the window shown on his site plan from the rear to the side of the proposed addition allowing no visual intrusion to his neighbors. The public hearing was closed. ON MOTION BY SPENCER AND SECOND BY SMITH, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 82-66 WAS APPROVED WITH REASONS, FINDINGS, AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOLLOWING, BY VOTE AS FOLLOWS: REASONS: 1. There are numerous properties within the area developed at earlier standards which allowed for reduced setbacks. 2. The proposal would not be inconsistent with what is existing in the area. FINDINGS: 1. The granting of the Conditional Exception will not constitute a grant of a special privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the vicinity. 2. Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity. -4- BZA 12/1/82 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 1, 1982 Page Five 3. The granting of a conditional exception is necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. 4. The granting of a conditional exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property in the same zone classifications. 5. The granting of the conditional exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach.. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The conceptual plot plan received November 10, 1982, shall be the approved layout. In its approval action, the Board of Zoning Adjustments considered the following issues relating to the conceptual plan.- - Lot area; - Lot width and' lot depth; - Type of use and its relation to property and improvements in the immediate vicinity. GENERAL CONDITIONS: 1. The master bedroom window facing alley shown on site plan dated November 10, 1982, shall be relocated to the�side of the structure - there shall be no window or opening, on the second floor addition fronting on the alley. 2. Separation between proposed addition and existing accessory structure shall conform with Ordinance Code requirements or shall be eliminated.. AYES: Spencer, Evans, Smith, Vogelsang NOES: None ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL.EXCEPTION NO. 82-68 Applicant: Mr. Gene N. Hill To permit a five (5) foot fence to encroach into portion of front yard setback.. Property located at 17065 Marina Bay Drive.. Acting Chairman Evans introduced the application and' stated that this request is categorically exempt,- Class.. 5,, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. -5- BZA. 12/1/82 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 1, 1982 Page Six Acting Secretary Spencer briefly outlined the proposal. The Board reviewed the applicant's plans submitted. Mr. Spencer pointed out the recent room addition and the area depicted on the plan showing the location for the proposed swimming pool which is required to be fenced. He called the Board's attention to the lot configuration, located on a cul-de-sac, and depending on how you look at the property, the exterior side yard technically could be considered as the front yard area. It was noted that the applicant's plan allowed no visual intrusion to the neighboring properties. The public hearing was opened with Mr. Gene Hill, applicant, present to speak in favor of his application. The applicant was questioned on materials to be used for the fence. Mr. Hill stated that he would prefer to use masonry block, painted the same color as his home, for privacy and wind blockage. He further stated that if the Board felt that rod iron would aesthetically be more appealing, matching existing fence constructed two (2) feet from the public right-of-way by the contractor (John D. Lusk) without a permit, he would be willing to do so. The public hearing was closed by Acting Chairman Evans. Board discussion ensued discussing a recent variance which was approved with a similar lot configuration. ON MOTION BY EVANS AND SECOND BY SMITH, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 82-68 WAS APPROVED WITH REASONS, FINDINGS, AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOLLOWING, BY VOTE AS FOLLOWS: REASONS: 1. The lot is on a cul-de-sac and is of unusual shape. 2. The area in question is really more of a side yard than a front yard and is simply a front yard setback because of the cul-de- sac lot. 3. The construction of a fence in that location will not cause any visual impact to the neighbors. FINDINGS: 1, The granting of the Conditional Exception will not constitute a grant of a special privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the vicinity. 2. Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity. -6- BZA 12/l/82 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 1, 1982 Page Seven 3. The granting of a conditional exception is necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. 4. The granting of a conditional exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property in the same zone classifications. 5. The granting of the conditional exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The conceptual plot plan received November 16, 1982, shall be the approved layout. In its approval action, the Board of Zoning Adjustments considered the following issues relating to the conceptual plan: - Lot width and lot depth; - Type of use and its relation to property and improvements in the immediate vicinity; Past administrative action regarding this property. AYES: Spencer, Evans, Smith, Vogelsang NOES: None ABSTAIN: None CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 82-69 Applicant: J. M. Monroe Contracting To permit portion of second story addition to encroach into portion of front yard setback. Property located at 16091 Santa Barbara Lane. Acting Chairman Evans introduced the proposal and stated that this request is categorically exempt, Class. 5, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Acting Secretary Spencer outlined the applicant's request. He informed the Board Members that in this particular tract of homes many were constructed with a front yard setback for the garage at 7-1/2 feet. This request is to permit a two-story addition over the applicants garage modifying the floor plan. It was originally felt that since the tract was developed with many 7-1/2 ft. front yard setbacks for garages that a variance application for an addition over the garage was not necessary and were approved administratively. It has since been determined that a variance application is required. Previous similar applications -7- BZA 12/1/82 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 1, 1982 Page Eight for this particular tract were discussed with findings that the request was minimal with some homes in the tract "originally" constructed with the same amenity as being requested. The public hearing was opened by Acting Chairman Evans. Mr. Jack Monroe addressed the Board and stated that he had completed construction of three other similar additions on Santa Barbara Lane and felt that,based on this rationale, subject application should receive comparable approval by the City. The public hearing was closed. It was the consensus of all the Board Members that approval should be granted for the proposed second -story addition over the applicant's garage. ON MOTION BY SMITH AND SECOND BY SPENCER, CONDITIONAL EXCEPTION NO. 82-69 WAS APPROVED WITH REASONS, FINDINGS, AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOLLOWING, BY VOTE AS FOLLOWS: REASONS: 1. Hardship is created by the size and shape of the lot. The applicant is requesting a continuation of initial construction in the tract including setbacks and all the amenities and architectural features for construction. 2. This would be a request of parity consistent with past City actions within the applicant's tract of homes. FINDINGS: 1. The granting of the Conditional Exception will not constitute a grant of a special privilege inconsistent upon other properties in the vicinity. 2. Because of special circumstances applicable to the subject property, the strict application of the zoning ordinance is found to deprive the subject property of privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity. 3. The granting of a conditional exception is necessary in order to preserve the enjoyment of one or more substantial property rights. 4. The granting of a conditional exception will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare, or injurious to property in the same zone classifications. 5. The granting of the conditional exception will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Huntington Beach. -8- BZA 12/1/82 1 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 1, 1982 Page Nine CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The conceptual plot plan and elevations received November 18, 1982, shall be the approved layout. In its approval action, the Board of Zoning Adjustments considered the following issues relating to the conceptual plan: - Lot width and lot depth; - Type of use and its relation to property and improvements in the immediate vicinity; - Past administrative action regarding this property.. AYES: Spencer, Evans, Vogelsang, Smith NOES: None ABSTAIN: None USE PERMIT NO. 82-47 Applicant: World Wide Marriage Encounter Assembly of God Expression To permit a one (1) day yard sale (December 4, 1982). Location at 17581 Newland Street. The proposal was introduced by Acting Chairman Evans. This request is categorically exempt, Class. 1, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Acting Secretary Spencer briefly outlined the proposal. The public hearing was opened with Lorraine Mason present representing the proposal. Upon the Board's review of the plot plan submitted it was felt. that the one -day yard sale, for charity purposes, would create no impacts with ample parking available in the complex. Mrs. Mason addressed the Board and confirmed that there will be no -booths (tables to be used) for the yard sale and that as it will. be held during daylight hours, electricity will not be required. The public hearing was closed by Acting Chairman Evans-.. ON MOTION BY SPENCER AND SECOND BY EVANS, USE PERMIT NO,. 82-47 WAS APPROVED WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOLLOWING, BY VOTE AS FOLLOWS: FINDINGS: 1. The establishment, maintenance and operation of the use will not be detrimental to: a. The general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity; -9- BZA 12/1/82 Minutest H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 1, 1982 Page Ten b. Property and improvements in the vicinity of such use. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The conceptual plot plan received November 23, 1982, shall be the approved layout. In its approval action, the Board of Zoning Adjustments considered the following issues realting to the conceptual plan: - Traffic circulation and drives; - Parking layout; - Lot area; - Type of use and its relation to property and improvements in the immediate vicinity. AYES: Spencer, Evans, Smith, Vogelsang NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-79 (Miscellaneous Item) Applicants: K.W. Donsbach & Gordon Mountjoy Request for extension - To permit construction of a 20,000 sq. ft. building for office, manufacturing, storage, education -training, sales, clinic and other related operations. Location is 7422 Mountjoy. Acting Secretary Spencer informed the Board that two applications were previously approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustments for this particular location: A.R. No. 81-75 for construction of a parking lot and landscaping and A.R. No. 81-79 for an extension to an industrial building. He stated that the parking compound has been constructed and that the applicant is going to post a Bond with the City to establish landscaping for the parking compound in conjunction with relandscaping of existing building upon completion of proposed extension within a time -frame of eighteen (18) months. He further stated that the applicants lender requested assurance that Administrative Review No. 81-79 extension will be granted. ON MOTION BY SPENCER AND SECOND BY SMITH, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW NO. 81-79 WAS GRANTED A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME, WITH'PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL APPLICABLE, BY VOTE AS FOLLOWS: AYES: Spencer, Evans, Smith, Vogelsang NOES: None ABSTAIN: None �10- BZA 12/1/82 Minutes; H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 1, 1982 Page Eleven TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 82-573 Applicant: Mr. James D.' Foss To create a one (1) lot Industrial Subdivision. Property located on the east side of Gothard between Slater and Talbert Streets (Assessor's Parcel No. 111-010-25). The proposal was introduced by Acting Chairman Evans. He stated that this request is categorically exempt, Class. 15, California Environmental Quality Act, 1970. Acting Secretary Spencer outlined the applicant's request: He informed the Board that sometime back the City cited the applicant for allowing a trucking company to use his property without having entitlement. An administrative review and a conditional exception application were filed. On the conditional exception they asked for a waiver to certain landscape requirements, which was later appealed to the Planning Commission, thereafter denied by City Council. The City and the applicant ended up in a court action whereby Poss/Foss refiled another application which was heard by the Planning Commission. The applicants did not agree with the conditions imposed by the Planning Commission and, consequently, the improvements were not implemented. Again, the City and the applicants went to court. The court instructed the Poss/Foss people and the City's Attorney to make a "Gentlemen's Agreement" together outside of court. From those meetings, it was concluded that a tentative parcel map would be filed along with an administrative review (wherein improvements would be established for the A.R. negotiated between'the lawyers for both parties). Jim Foss, Applicant and Paul Calvo, Surveyor, were present to speak on the application. Condition of Approval No. 3 and 6 (shown below) were discussed with the applicant. Mr. Foss stated that he objected to dedication of his property as the City had not required the adjacent property owners to make dedication and that he still has a temporary storm drain going across his property in order to alleviate the flooding problem of which he can't do anything about it. Acting Chairman Evans informed the applicant that he felt the problem has been reduced from its peak as the City constructed a storm drain on Talbert which lessened the flow of water from the property. As to the other adjacent property owners not dedicating for easements, etc., the applicant was advised that dedication was a condition of approval imposed on the adjacent property owners as a requirement and that if dedication is not made it will be enforced through our City Attorney's Office. The applicant was asked if he intended to file an administrative review. He replied that, at this point, he did not know as he was unaware of just where they stood from the last Court action. It was mentioned that if the applicant continues to use the property and decides not to file an administrative review, he will be in violation as he was directed by the Court to reactivate his administrative application. -11- BZA 12/1/82 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 1, 1982 Page Twelve With necessary physical improvements to be established on a future administrative review application, the Board Members concurred with conditionally approving the Tentative Parcel Map granting the applicant's request for a one (1) lot Industrial subdivision. ON MOTION BY SPENCER AND SECOND BY SMITH, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP NO. 82-573 WAS CONDITIONALLY APPROVED WITH FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOLLOWING, BY VOTE AS FOLLOWS: FINDINGS: 1. The proposed one (1) lot subdivision, for purpose of Industrial Use, is in compliance with the size and shape of property necessary for that type of development. 2. The General Plan has set forth provisions for this type of land use as well as setting forth objectives for implementation of this type of use. 3. The property was previously studied for this intensity of land use at the time the land use designation for Light Industrial District allowing for Industrial buildings was placed on the subject property. 4. The size, depth, frontage, street width and other design and improvement features of the proposed subdivision are proposed to be constructed in compliance with the State Map Act and supplemental City Subdivision Ordinance. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: A. TO BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO USE OR OCCUPANCY OF SAID PARCEL FOR ANY PURPOSE: 1. The tentative parcel map received by the Department of Development Services on November 10, 1982, shall be the approved layout. 2. A parcel map shall be filed with and approved by the Department of Public Works and recorded with the Orange County Recorder. 3, Metzler Lane and its extension to Gothard Street shall be dedicated to City standards. 4. The property shall participate in the local drainage assessment district at the time said parcel is developed. (Contact the Department of Public Works for additional information). -12- BZA 12/1/82 Minutes: H.B. Board of Zoning Adjustments December 1, 1982 Page Thirteen 5. A copy of the recorded parcel map shall be filed with the Department of Development Services. 6. The ten (10) foot storm drain easement as shown along the easterly property line shall be revised to twenty (20) feet or a dimension acceptable to the Department of Public Works. AYES: Spencer, Smith, Evans, Vogelsang NOES: None ABSTAIN: None THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED. es . S ence , cting Secretary 4oard of Zoning djustments : j s -13- BZA 12/l/82